Parallax_M
BACKER
1990
Unsure how to mark this because I called it quits after about three attempts at fighting Mr. Dream / Mike Tyson because I could tell the time investment required to beat him wasn’t going to be worth it for me. Thinking back to the hardest bosses I’ve ever fought in games a few come to mind - the robot guy from cuphead, father gascoigne in bloodborne (mostly due to him being the first souls boss I ever tried to fight), shadow link from Zelda 2, and a couple from the original Castlevania and the original Ninja Gaiden. In all of these cases I could tell right away that I’d be able to beat them after at most a couple hours of attempts. Mr Dream is the first boss I’ve ever encountered in a game where I immediately got the feeling that I’d have to spend tens of hours practicing my Punch Out technique before I could even get to the point where beating him would be possible after a couple hours of attempts. My grasp on the mechanics simply wasn’t strong enough for beating him to be even remotely possible. Hardest boss I’ve ever encountered in a game by far and wanted to write this review to preserve that fact.
1984
Pretty decent NES pinball game. The most important thing with a game like this - and something I wasn’t sure Nintendo would have gotten right in 1984 - is that the physics of the ball and the bumpers and paddles feel realistic, which they do in this game. Playing this feels like playing a real pinball machine which is definitely to be commended. That said, this is a very simple pinball game. The different bonuses you can earn are pretty blah and don’t really add anything exciting to the game. There’s a pretty boring breakout style bonus game but that’s really it. No interesting graphics when you get a bonus, no second ball, just the bonus game and the potential to earn a stopper by your paddles to prevent you from losing a ball. I played this normally for a while and then used save states until I could see every potential bonus, so I’m fairly certain this is the extent of them.
Also - unsure if this is part of the game or a weird glitch but your paddles turn invisible if you score 100k points. I’m assuming this is intentional but it’s implemented in a way where it’s quite difficult to tell. The paddles don’t flash before disappearing or anything they’re just suddenly gone.
Overall this is a fun little pinball game and definitely one of the better black box NES games I’ve played. It is a very simple pinball game however. I’m not a connoisseur of pinball games but I’m certain there are much better ones out there if you’re into that sort of thing.
Also - unsure if this is part of the game or a weird glitch but your paddles turn invisible if you score 100k points. I’m assuming this is intentional but it’s implemented in a way where it’s quite difficult to tell. The paddles don’t flash before disappearing or anything they’re just suddenly gone.
Overall this is a fun little pinball game and definitely one of the better black box NES games I’ve played. It is a very simple pinball game however. I’m not a connoisseur of pinball games but I’m certain there are much better ones out there if you’re into that sort of thing.
TL;DR - it sucks but probably not quite as much as you would think. Contrary to what many say, the story is also pretty bad but at least entertaining in how unhinged it is.
I was honestly expecting it to be much worse. The way people talk about this game I almost anticipated it bricking my pc or being a soulless half life clone with a coat of Deus Ex paint. It's definitely not THAT bad, but its by no means good and obviously comes nowhere close to living up to the original.
Here's my description of the game: imagine if the simplified gameplay of human revolution existed on the original xbox and was less balanced, polished, well designed, and less fleshed out. That's what this game felt like to me. The game exists in a strange place where its mostly an fps with some very light stealth and immersive sim elements. Like the original you can hack security systems, move objects to make alternate paths, shoot through glass to make new exits and entrances, blow up doors instead of unlocking them, etc. All of this however is far less extensively implemented than in the original. Unlike the original there are no skill points or stats, so you can use any weapon you want right off the bat. Hacking now requires an augmentation instead of skill points. Opening doors and electronic devices is now done with a generic multitool that isn't governed or improved by any stats.
In terms of level design, the levels are far smaller and less open than in the original. In the original most situations had 5 or more ways of approaching; in IW you're lucky if you get 2. The options are usually hallway 1 or hallway 2 and sometimes hallway 1 or vent. The levels can be fun to explore for their own sake and comb through for supplies and upgrades but exploring rarely nets you a new way to interact with the level or approach a challenge.
The immense codex of notes, emails, and passwords that you collect in the original is also missing here. For the simplified console experience this is a sensible change but I really found myself missing it in IW. The levels and tasks required of the player are far simpler than in the original so you don't need all of this information to complete the game. This change does however do a good job at illustrating the differences between the two games. Completing levels in the original was like solving a big puzzle using your own creativity and clues found around the environment. Solving levels in IW is literally just walking down linear corridors and shooting or avoiding enemies.
Gunplay in IW is far closer to a standard FPS than the original Deus Ex which I suppose could be considered a stats based shooter. Shooting in DE needed to be done very carefully and intentionally. In IW it's much easier to just whip out a gun and start firing away. Stealth mechanics in IW are mostly fine. The levels and enemies, however, are clearly not designed around stealth. There is no reliable one shot takedown melee attack like there is in the original if you hit enemies from behind. Not even basic grunts go down in one hit. You can upgrade your melee attack with augs and EVEN then it takes multiple hits to take down enemies from behind. I even switched the game to easy mode to see if it would work there and it takes at least two hits to take down basic grunts. There are also several enemies that you cannot practically take down with stealth based melee attacks. In the original, if you had the right weapon - like the dragon's tooth - you could take down even bulky enemies using stealth. The only ones that you couldn't practically do this with were the MIB, which were sparsely implemented and provided a nice challenge for players. in IW basically every enemy by the end of the game functions like an MIB - injuring the player if taken down using melee - and thus incentivizing gun play as opposed to stealth. By the final level of the game you'll be rushing down corridors blowing enemies away with your rocket launcher and headshotting them with a sniper rifle in a relatively mindless way.
This however doesn't mean that the game is easy. IW is shockingly and nonsensically much harder than Deus Ex when played on normal mode. Enemies will regularly one or two shot you in gunfights. This was also the case in the original but was much easier to get around due to the effectiveness of stealth, the multiple avenues for facing each challenge and the various augs and pieces of armor that could be used to buff your stats. IW is of course far less open, doesnt have any stats, has few defensive augs, and doesn't have armor. In IW when the only method of approaching a situation is sometimes a gunfight the game can get very frustrating - especially if you've only been purchasing and upgrading stealth-based augs.
The most interesting element of the game is definitely the story. It takes place a few decades after the original deus ex and hilariously assumes that all three endings took place at the same time. Writing is overall quite a bit weaker and less memorable than in the original but is still serviceable. IW does make a genuine effort to allow the player to make choices in which factions they support and does somewhat alter character interactions based on this - sometimes having characters unexpectedly return later to reward players for helping them in a side quest or deciding to spare their lives. The freedom players have to support different factions, however, is often implemented in a rather nonsensical way. There's no hidden or visible faction reputation mechanic so players are literally free to switch sides every single mission and kill important faction members with absolutely no consequence until the game decides to make them pick an ending during the final level. If you decide to pick a faction and stick with it from the beginning you probably wont notice this element of the game's design, but it can be very jarring and a bit laughable for anyone else.
The themes of IW are also similar to the original deus ex being about surveillance, privatization, class, and what it means to be human. The way these themes are presented, however, is only sometimes effective and generally much less nuanced than in the original. The more successful moments usually happen with simpler critiques along the lines of basic commentary about consolidation of power in large corporations. The subtext of the game and especially that of the endings, however, can at times be truly unhinged. Beloved characters from the original return in IW but instead of fighting to free humanity from oppressive power structures now work to serve that same power they once resisted. This is possibly a depressing commentary on human nature and how power continually grinds down those that try to resist it with punishment and incentives until basically everyone bends the knee and becomes a servant to it. Its also possibly a total reversal of the themes of the original game if taken with the context of the endings which seem to imply that these systems of power are our only options and that any attempt to resist them will basically destroy humanity in one way or another. Either way, it's a fascinating albeit very disappointing shift for the series in the case of the latter. There are multiple endings in this game which are honestly hilarious in how massively they change the world of deus ex depending on player choices. I wont spoil anything but your adventure in IW could easily be remembered in the history books of the deus ex world as the most important series of events in human history.
Overall this game is a somewhat mid FPS with light immersive sim elements and a sometimes effective story that seemingly tries to follow in the thematic footsteps of the original game. I would really only recommend this game to hardcore deus ex fans that are curious to experience where the series went. That said, those fans probably wont enjoy this game but might find it interesting, which was the case for me. Its really not as bad as people say it is but it understandably left a VERY bad taste in people's mouths due to the expectation that it would carry on the legacy of one of the best games of all time. It's relatively short - around 10 hours long. I would normally criticize it for this but in the case of IW this is probably a positive.
N.B. - make sure to download community patches before playing since it can be difficult to get running on PC.
I was honestly expecting it to be much worse. The way people talk about this game I almost anticipated it bricking my pc or being a soulless half life clone with a coat of Deus Ex paint. It's definitely not THAT bad, but its by no means good and obviously comes nowhere close to living up to the original.
Here's my description of the game: imagine if the simplified gameplay of human revolution existed on the original xbox and was less balanced, polished, well designed, and less fleshed out. That's what this game felt like to me. The game exists in a strange place where its mostly an fps with some very light stealth and immersive sim elements. Like the original you can hack security systems, move objects to make alternate paths, shoot through glass to make new exits and entrances, blow up doors instead of unlocking them, etc. All of this however is far less extensively implemented than in the original. Unlike the original there are no skill points or stats, so you can use any weapon you want right off the bat. Hacking now requires an augmentation instead of skill points. Opening doors and electronic devices is now done with a generic multitool that isn't governed or improved by any stats.
In terms of level design, the levels are far smaller and less open than in the original. In the original most situations had 5 or more ways of approaching; in IW you're lucky if you get 2. The options are usually hallway 1 or hallway 2 and sometimes hallway 1 or vent. The levels can be fun to explore for their own sake and comb through for supplies and upgrades but exploring rarely nets you a new way to interact with the level or approach a challenge.
The immense codex of notes, emails, and passwords that you collect in the original is also missing here. For the simplified console experience this is a sensible change but I really found myself missing it in IW. The levels and tasks required of the player are far simpler than in the original so you don't need all of this information to complete the game. This change does however do a good job at illustrating the differences between the two games. Completing levels in the original was like solving a big puzzle using your own creativity and clues found around the environment. Solving levels in IW is literally just walking down linear corridors and shooting or avoiding enemies.
Gunplay in IW is far closer to a standard FPS than the original Deus Ex which I suppose could be considered a stats based shooter. Shooting in DE needed to be done very carefully and intentionally. In IW it's much easier to just whip out a gun and start firing away. Stealth mechanics in IW are mostly fine. The levels and enemies, however, are clearly not designed around stealth. There is no reliable one shot takedown melee attack like there is in the original if you hit enemies from behind. Not even basic grunts go down in one hit. You can upgrade your melee attack with augs and EVEN then it takes multiple hits to take down enemies from behind. I even switched the game to easy mode to see if it would work there and it takes at least two hits to take down basic grunts. There are also several enemies that you cannot practically take down with stealth based melee attacks. In the original, if you had the right weapon - like the dragon's tooth - you could take down even bulky enemies using stealth. The only ones that you couldn't practically do this with were the MIB, which were sparsely implemented and provided a nice challenge for players. in IW basically every enemy by the end of the game functions like an MIB - injuring the player if taken down using melee - and thus incentivizing gun play as opposed to stealth. By the final level of the game you'll be rushing down corridors blowing enemies away with your rocket launcher and headshotting them with a sniper rifle in a relatively mindless way.
This however doesn't mean that the game is easy. IW is shockingly and nonsensically much harder than Deus Ex when played on normal mode. Enemies will regularly one or two shot you in gunfights. This was also the case in the original but was much easier to get around due to the effectiveness of stealth, the multiple avenues for facing each challenge and the various augs and pieces of armor that could be used to buff your stats. IW is of course far less open, doesnt have any stats, has few defensive augs, and doesn't have armor. In IW when the only method of approaching a situation is sometimes a gunfight the game can get very frustrating - especially if you've only been purchasing and upgrading stealth-based augs.
The most interesting element of the game is definitely the story. It takes place a few decades after the original deus ex and hilariously assumes that all three endings took place at the same time. Writing is overall quite a bit weaker and less memorable than in the original but is still serviceable. IW does make a genuine effort to allow the player to make choices in which factions they support and does somewhat alter character interactions based on this - sometimes having characters unexpectedly return later to reward players for helping them in a side quest or deciding to spare their lives. The freedom players have to support different factions, however, is often implemented in a rather nonsensical way. There's no hidden or visible faction reputation mechanic so players are literally free to switch sides every single mission and kill important faction members with absolutely no consequence until the game decides to make them pick an ending during the final level. If you decide to pick a faction and stick with it from the beginning you probably wont notice this element of the game's design, but it can be very jarring and a bit laughable for anyone else.
The themes of IW are also similar to the original deus ex being about surveillance, privatization, class, and what it means to be human. The way these themes are presented, however, is only sometimes effective and generally much less nuanced than in the original. The more successful moments usually happen with simpler critiques along the lines of basic commentary about consolidation of power in large corporations. The subtext of the game and especially that of the endings, however, can at times be truly unhinged. Beloved characters from the original return in IW but instead of fighting to free humanity from oppressive power structures now work to serve that same power they once resisted. This is possibly a depressing commentary on human nature and how power continually grinds down those that try to resist it with punishment and incentives until basically everyone bends the knee and becomes a servant to it. Its also possibly a total reversal of the themes of the original game if taken with the context of the endings which seem to imply that these systems of power are our only options and that any attempt to resist them will basically destroy humanity in one way or another. Either way, it's a fascinating albeit very disappointing shift for the series in the case of the latter. There are multiple endings in this game which are honestly hilarious in how massively they change the world of deus ex depending on player choices. I wont spoil anything but your adventure in IW could easily be remembered in the history books of the deus ex world as the most important series of events in human history.
Overall this game is a somewhat mid FPS with light immersive sim elements and a sometimes effective story that seemingly tries to follow in the thematic footsteps of the original game. I would really only recommend this game to hardcore deus ex fans that are curious to experience where the series went. That said, those fans probably wont enjoy this game but might find it interesting, which was the case for me. Its really not as bad as people say it is but it understandably left a VERY bad taste in people's mouths due to the expectation that it would carry on the legacy of one of the best games of all time. It's relatively short - around 10 hours long. I would normally criticize it for this but in the case of IW this is probably a positive.
N.B. - make sure to download community patches before playing since it can be difficult to get running on PC.
2020
One of my favorite if not my favorite game of all time despite having quite a few glaring issues.
The reason it’s probably my favorite game of all time and why I’ve spent around 400 hours on it is that playing it just makes me happy. Despite having some dark themes, this is a feel good game if there ever was one. The characters and the world are just so charming. Playing this game feels like going on a relaxing vacation.
My main criticisms are twofold. First, the dungeons can definitely be a bit monotonous at times especially if you find yourself over leveled which is very easy to do. The dungeon design was improved in persona 5 but the ease with which you can become over leveled is a flaw present in pretty much all the persona games. This is a small criticism however. The game is still very fun and the dungeons aren’t really the reason to play it anyway.
My other main criticism regards many of the writing choices. The notable one is with the characterization of Kanji and Naoto in regards to the suggestion at various points of the game that they’re both queer. Now, these characters don’t have to be queer for them to be well written - that is not my critique at all - they could still be compelling and well written characters without that. My main issue is with the way the question of their queerness is resolved by the game. It honestly feels like some of the writers wanted to go further with it e.g. have Kanji be gay and come to terms with that in a positive way - but some higher up told them they couldn’t do that. This seems even more likely if you think about it in the context of the scrapped Yosuke romance option and the fact that even persona 2 had the option for the main character to be gay and confess his feelings for a male party member. If this higher up scenario was the case they should have ditched the focus on queerness altogether. As it stands we get a strange sort of half measure where the character arc feels at times very unnatural. The same goes for naoto, whose queerness is handled even more poorly IMO. The pinnacle of this being Yu getting to decide whether or not Naoto wears women’s or men’s clothing based on his preference if they’re dating. There’s actually a mod to change the dialogue in this scene to make the girl’s school uniform scene happen because Naoto wants to experiment with wearing girl’s clothes.
This is getting kind of rambling but here’s my main point: in a game where the main message is supposed to be coming to terms with your true self having two arcs where characters think they’re maybe queer and then realizing “oh wait I’m not” (either genuinely or due to social pressure) feels really bizarre. Why even bring up the question of their queerness in the first place if you’re going to do that. Kanji easily could have been a guy who likes traditionally feminine things and is embarrassed about it and has to come to terms with that and nothing else. Naoto would be a bit harder to fix since her wearing mens clothing is central to her character. It's really hard for me to imagine a way that arc could work without Naoto eventually identifying as gender non-conforming in some sense. Some people have proposed that Naoto's arc could be about a cis woman who crossdresses to fit in at work and then learns how to be comfortable with being a woman in a male-dominated profession. This, however would be an incredibly fraught and honestly quite boring route to take with Naoto. In Persona 4, Naoto's arc ends up being this really strange and confused story where she clearly feels more comfortable presenting as a boy in all situations but this is implied to be because she is just insecure about being a girl. The arc ends with the conclusion that naoto should just learn to be more confident about being a girl, which is a very unsatisfying and depressing conclusion for her arc and honestly just a very anti-trans sentiment that kind of stains what is otherwise a very likable and charming character.
My main point with all this - either go all the way and have realistic arcs about characters coming to terms with their queerness or scrap that angle altogether. It’s such a shame because Kanji and Naoto are such wonderfully written and likable characters in general. Their arcs, for all their flaws also have some really touching and wonderful moments. I just wish the entirety of the arcs was like that and didn’t suffer at times from confused and indecisive writing where it feels like two different people with very different ideas of where the arcs should go were butting heads. This issue of character development that seems to fly in the face of Persona 4's supposed theme is present to some degree in pretty much every main character arc.
All of this said I still adore this game and it’s still one of my favorites. It is however a very flawed game and by no means the best I’ve ever played. Replaying this game necessitates me relying on extensive head canon as well as mods to fix some of its more glaring writing issues, which is honestly a shame. To anyone reading this review who really loves this game - these criticisms aren't meant to spoil your enjoyment of persona 4 or make a claim that you're bad for liking it. It's totally fine to love this game and it's also totally fine to really dislike this game - there are certainly a lot of valid reasons for people to dislike it. For everyone who does love this game, however, I think its important for all of us to be critical of media we enjoy. It's very possible to admit that a piece of media is flawed or problematic and still thoroughly enjoy it in spite of that. After all, Persona 4G definitely has a lot to enjoy despite its flaws.
The reason it’s probably my favorite game of all time and why I’ve spent around 400 hours on it is that playing it just makes me happy. Despite having some dark themes, this is a feel good game if there ever was one. The characters and the world are just so charming. Playing this game feels like going on a relaxing vacation.
My main criticisms are twofold. First, the dungeons can definitely be a bit monotonous at times especially if you find yourself over leveled which is very easy to do. The dungeon design was improved in persona 5 but the ease with which you can become over leveled is a flaw present in pretty much all the persona games. This is a small criticism however. The game is still very fun and the dungeons aren’t really the reason to play it anyway.
My other main criticism regards many of the writing choices. The notable one is with the characterization of Kanji and Naoto in regards to the suggestion at various points of the game that they’re both queer. Now, these characters don’t have to be queer for them to be well written - that is not my critique at all - they could still be compelling and well written characters without that. My main issue is with the way the question of their queerness is resolved by the game. It honestly feels like some of the writers wanted to go further with it e.g. have Kanji be gay and come to terms with that in a positive way - but some higher up told them they couldn’t do that. This seems even more likely if you think about it in the context of the scrapped Yosuke romance option and the fact that even persona 2 had the option for the main character to be gay and confess his feelings for a male party member. If this higher up scenario was the case they should have ditched the focus on queerness altogether. As it stands we get a strange sort of half measure where the character arc feels at times very unnatural. The same goes for naoto, whose queerness is handled even more poorly IMO. The pinnacle of this being Yu getting to decide whether or not Naoto wears women’s or men’s clothing based on his preference if they’re dating. There’s actually a mod to change the dialogue in this scene to make the girl’s school uniform scene happen because Naoto wants to experiment with wearing girl’s clothes.
This is getting kind of rambling but here’s my main point: in a game where the main message is supposed to be coming to terms with your true self having two arcs where characters think they’re maybe queer and then realizing “oh wait I’m not” (either genuinely or due to social pressure) feels really bizarre. Why even bring up the question of their queerness in the first place if you’re going to do that. Kanji easily could have been a guy who likes traditionally feminine things and is embarrassed about it and has to come to terms with that and nothing else. Naoto would be a bit harder to fix since her wearing mens clothing is central to her character. It's really hard for me to imagine a way that arc could work without Naoto eventually identifying as gender non-conforming in some sense. Some people have proposed that Naoto's arc could be about a cis woman who crossdresses to fit in at work and then learns how to be comfortable with being a woman in a male-dominated profession. This, however would be an incredibly fraught and honestly quite boring route to take with Naoto. In Persona 4, Naoto's arc ends up being this really strange and confused story where she clearly feels more comfortable presenting as a boy in all situations but this is implied to be because she is just insecure about being a girl. The arc ends with the conclusion that naoto should just learn to be more confident about being a girl, which is a very unsatisfying and depressing conclusion for her arc and honestly just a very anti-trans sentiment that kind of stains what is otherwise a very likable and charming character.
My main point with all this - either go all the way and have realistic arcs about characters coming to terms with their queerness or scrap that angle altogether. It’s such a shame because Kanji and Naoto are such wonderfully written and likable characters in general. Their arcs, for all their flaws also have some really touching and wonderful moments. I just wish the entirety of the arcs was like that and didn’t suffer at times from confused and indecisive writing where it feels like two different people with very different ideas of where the arcs should go were butting heads. This issue of character development that seems to fly in the face of Persona 4's supposed theme is present to some degree in pretty much every main character arc.
All of this said I still adore this game and it’s still one of my favorites. It is however a very flawed game and by no means the best I’ve ever played. Replaying this game necessitates me relying on extensive head canon as well as mods to fix some of its more glaring writing issues, which is honestly a shame. To anyone reading this review who really loves this game - these criticisms aren't meant to spoil your enjoyment of persona 4 or make a claim that you're bad for liking it. It's totally fine to love this game and it's also totally fine to really dislike this game - there are certainly a lot of valid reasons for people to dislike it. For everyone who does love this game, however, I think its important for all of us to be critical of media we enjoy. It's very possible to admit that a piece of media is flawed or problematic and still thoroughly enjoy it in spite of that. After all, Persona 4G definitely has a lot to enjoy despite its flaws.
2003
This is genuinely the noisiest most abrasive game I’ve ever played. I don’t think I’ve ever felt as overwhelmed playing a game as I did with this one. Started my playthrough using headphones and halfway through the first level after trudging through room after room of several different monsters making their varied wailing, grunting, and screaming sounds while accompanied by the blaring harsh noise of the radio I legitimately thought I was going to have a panic attack and had to turn the game off. Ended up continuing my playthrough just using my computer speakers.
The visual design creates a similar experience with some areas bathing you in darkness and layering on so many visual effects that it’s almost impossible to see what’s going on. Imagine this with the soundscape I mentioned and then imagine fumbling around in the dark looking for a barely perceptible door while monsters with giant knives for hands stun lock you and repeatedly stab you in the face.
The gameplay in SH3 is adjusted from the other games in line with this abrasiveness. Resources in this game as significantly more scarce than they are in other SH games, which forces you to run away from the vast majority of encounters. My strategy for the previous two games was to avoid enemies outdoors where it’s easy to do so and then kill them indoors where there’s not enough space to avoid them. This is no longer possible in SH3 and it adds to how oppressive and overwhelming this game can feel. One of the benefits of killing enemies in any of the Silent Hill games is simply being able to shut them up and have a brief moment of relative silence to explore. You generally don’t have this luxury in this game, so it ends up being an almost non stop sensory nightmare.
SH3 is a very unique game for all of these reasons and one that I was glad to play through despite being quite agitated while doing so. Fulfills my ocasional perverse desire to experience this sort of state through media. Normally can only do that by listening to super abrasive music. Cool there’s actually a video game out there that can legitimately do the same thing.
This game does have quite a bit of bullshit in it like the subway level and a couple puzzles that feel genuinely poorly designed as opposed to just difficult, which wasn’t the case for the previous two games IMO. Normally would rate this an 8/10 but bumping up the score for how unique this game is.
The visual design creates a similar experience with some areas bathing you in darkness and layering on so many visual effects that it’s almost impossible to see what’s going on. Imagine this with the soundscape I mentioned and then imagine fumbling around in the dark looking for a barely perceptible door while monsters with giant knives for hands stun lock you and repeatedly stab you in the face.
The gameplay in SH3 is adjusted from the other games in line with this abrasiveness. Resources in this game as significantly more scarce than they are in other SH games, which forces you to run away from the vast majority of encounters. My strategy for the previous two games was to avoid enemies outdoors where it’s easy to do so and then kill them indoors where there’s not enough space to avoid them. This is no longer possible in SH3 and it adds to how oppressive and overwhelming this game can feel. One of the benefits of killing enemies in any of the Silent Hill games is simply being able to shut them up and have a brief moment of relative silence to explore. You generally don’t have this luxury in this game, so it ends up being an almost non stop sensory nightmare.
SH3 is a very unique game for all of these reasons and one that I was glad to play through despite being quite agitated while doing so. Fulfills my ocasional perverse desire to experience this sort of state through media. Normally can only do that by listening to super abrasive music. Cool there’s actually a video game out there that can legitimately do the same thing.
This game does have quite a bit of bullshit in it like the subway level and a couple puzzles that feel genuinely poorly designed as opposed to just difficult, which wasn’t the case for the previous two games IMO. Normally would rate this an 8/10 but bumping up the score for how unique this game is.
This review contains spoilers
So much has already been said about ludonarritive dissonance and the core themes of this game, so I won’t retread that ground here. Just a short take that encapsulates my problems with this game.
While gameplay is obviously fantastic, as was the case with the original, the games writing, which is centered around a core thesis about vengeance and cyclical violence REALLY falls flat for me. It falls flat because it doesn’t really spend any time actually interrogating how and why Ellie got to a place where she was so blinded and so easily able to commit mass murder. Joel being killed in front of her doesn’t fly for me as an interesting or believable justification. What is it about some people’s experiences and outlooks and personalities or the environment they live in that allows them to take their pain and heartache and grief and direct it into a violent outburst towards other people. Why do some people persevere and heal, or succumb to hopelessness and depression, or self medicate to escape their feelings, and why do some turn violent. Most people who engage in or support acts of violence don’t view themselves as evil monsters. They either convince themselves that what they’re doing is justified or necessary or they find ways to ignore the impact of their actions. How does Ellie justify her actions? How does Ellie perhaps manage to stay in denial about the impact her violence is having? These would be actually interesting things for the game to interrogate. Instead we get “cyclical violence and revenge is bad.” - a statement so obvious and so foundational to almost every moral philosophy that many if not most people who enact revenge and perpetuate cyclical violence actually agree with it. We’re shown that revenge and violence is bad through viscerally disturbing scenes of violence and a story about a beloved character’s descent into being a frankly evil mass murderer, which combined is so depressing it could almost rival Dancer in the Dark. The audience is expected to put up with a lot of uncomfortable emotions when playing this game, and it ultimately ends up being in service of a message that is both trite and overwrought. It’s my opinion that if you’re going to put the audience through an experience thats viscerally upsetting it needs to be in service of something that is truly worthwhile and meaningful and something that needs to be disturbing to work. The Last or Us Part II simply does not earn its most uncomfortable moments and doesn’t use them to say anything novel or insightful.
What a waste. Both of the audience’s time and emotional energy as well as the money and pain and suffering that went into making this game.
While gameplay is obviously fantastic, as was the case with the original, the games writing, which is centered around a core thesis about vengeance and cyclical violence REALLY falls flat for me. It falls flat because it doesn’t really spend any time actually interrogating how and why Ellie got to a place where she was so blinded and so easily able to commit mass murder. Joel being killed in front of her doesn’t fly for me as an interesting or believable justification. What is it about some people’s experiences and outlooks and personalities or the environment they live in that allows them to take their pain and heartache and grief and direct it into a violent outburst towards other people. Why do some people persevere and heal, or succumb to hopelessness and depression, or self medicate to escape their feelings, and why do some turn violent. Most people who engage in or support acts of violence don’t view themselves as evil monsters. They either convince themselves that what they’re doing is justified or necessary or they find ways to ignore the impact of their actions. How does Ellie justify her actions? How does Ellie perhaps manage to stay in denial about the impact her violence is having? These would be actually interesting things for the game to interrogate. Instead we get “cyclical violence and revenge is bad.” - a statement so obvious and so foundational to almost every moral philosophy that many if not most people who enact revenge and perpetuate cyclical violence actually agree with it. We’re shown that revenge and violence is bad through viscerally disturbing scenes of violence and a story about a beloved character’s descent into being a frankly evil mass murderer, which combined is so depressing it could almost rival Dancer in the Dark. The audience is expected to put up with a lot of uncomfortable emotions when playing this game, and it ultimately ends up being in service of a message that is both trite and overwrought. It’s my opinion that if you’re going to put the audience through an experience thats viscerally upsetting it needs to be in service of something that is truly worthwhile and meaningful and something that needs to be disturbing to work. The Last or Us Part II simply does not earn its most uncomfortable moments and doesn’t use them to say anything novel or insightful.
What a waste. Both of the audience’s time and emotional energy as well as the money and pain and suffering that went into making this game.
1985
Can be a fun time in short bursts if you’re in the mood for a very simple arcade style platformer. Holy hell though the jumping and the way you ricochet off walls is infuriating. Really makes you appreciate how well Super Mario Bros. or even just Mario Bros. controls. The really awkward movement in this game can make for interesting albeit probably frustrating challenge if you’re in to that sort of thing I guess. Doubt I’ll ever pick this one up again.
This is definitely the weakest of the original three thief games - by a pretty wide mile IMO. I went into this expecting an Invisible War situation, but it’s thankfully not that bad - not even close actually. This is a pretty decent experience with a lot of the DNA of the first two Thief games but also with a lot of significant problems that weren’t present in those titles.
The biggest and most immediately apparent issue is Garrett’s movement. Deadly Shadows ditched the engine used for the first two Thief games and movement in this new engine is really janky and at times just bad. Mandalore’s review of this game is illuminating in this regard but to quickly summarize - most of these issues come from the poorly implemented 3rd person perspective and the way the position and physicality of Garrett’s body interacts with objects in the environment. Garrett’s movement feels sluggish, he regularly gets caught on the environment, he frequently glitches out and starts floating around the level, and trying to jump on and vault over objects is an absolute nightmare. Whenever you try to climb through an open window there’s a 90% chance you’ll just jump in place, alerting every nearby guard in the process. Using the blackjack to stealthily knock out guards is similarly janky. Unlike in the previous games where the blackjack can knock out a guard from any angle as long as you’re undetected, Deadly Shadows requires you be at a very precise angle behind an enemy for the knock-out to work. If you get the wrong angle (which is very easy to do even when you’re directly behind a guard) you’ll just give them a weak little bop on the noggin causing them to turn around and immediately stab you in the chest. All of this jank pretty much necessitates frequent quick saving unless you’re willing to let the game’s bad movement mechanics blow a stealth run for absolutely no reason. This required save-scumming likely won’t bother people who would be doing that anyway i.e truly elevated players that realize save scumming is one of the proudest PC gaming traditions and a very cool thing to be mildly addicted to, but it can be bummer for anyone who quick saves infrequently because they enjoy being forced to adapt to mistakes they might make. I honestly thought about ditching the game during the tutorial mission due to how bad movement felt. It’s incredibly jarring if you’re playing it right after finishing the previous two Thief titles like I was. I got used to it after about an hour however, and the game can still be fun in spite of it. All in all movement is serviceable but at times very frustrating and generally just a huge step down from the near perfect movement mechanics of the original two games.
Level design and gameplay follow in the footsteps of the original two games with a large focus on light and sound, slow meticulous movement, and the creative use of Garrett’s tools. DS is, however, a lot more linear than the first two games, which takes away a lot of the immersive sim elements present in those titles. The atmosphere in DS is very strong though. Ambient music plays a much larger role in this game, frequently veering into full on horror territory, and it creates an emotional experience that can be very different from that of the first two games. In levels that really lean into the horror tone there can be a tremendous amount of tension, which does work well in short bursts. “Robbing the Cradle” is one of these levels and has risen to somewhat legendary status due to how scary it is. It’s a master class in atmosphere and level design and definitely one of the highlights of the game even if it doesn’t engage with DS’s stealth mechanics as effectively as other levels do.
The biggest intentional difference between Deadly Shadows and its predecessors is the presence of a hub world. In between missions you’ll be given the opportunity to explore various districts of The City. In The City you can sell your loot to a fence (something you have to do manually now, which I found to be a fun and immersion increasing gameplay feature as opposed to a pointless annoyance), you can take on side quests, look for loot, and also search for maps that you can use to get your bearings in future missions. All of this is generally pretty fun and works relatively well. It has a lot of potential but unfortunately fails to fully realize it most of the time. The City is pretty samey and can get boring to walk through after a while. Side quests also usually boil down to hints about where loot is stashed and nothing more. There are also moments where DS seems to be going for a dynamic hub world that reacts to the player’s behavior during missions, but this ultimately isn’t fleshed out. There are only a few instances of very minor dynamic interactions between the hub world and player choices. These all work well and feel rewarding and immersive, but I just wish the game leaned into it more heavily. Using the hub world to actually make you think about what you steal, who you steal from, and how violently you behave on missions is a really interesting idea for a Thief game. That’s sadly not the game we got with Deadly Shadows though. Different factions roam the hub world and depending on whether or not Garrett has done some quick side quests to raise his reputation with them they may or may not be hostile to him. These factions also interact with each other in the streets, which is a cool idea, but is implemented horribly. By the end of the game, five different factions are in an all out war with each other - and seemingly with civilians as well. During this part of the game you can just hide and wait for the factions to kill each other, so you can walk around the hub world mostly unopposed. It’s ends up being unintentionally hilarious just how chaotic and ridiculous this all is.
Another intentional difference between DS and the previous two games (Thief 2 in particular) is the simplifying of in game maps. The maps in Thief 1 were often vague and didn’t include every area of a level but would highlight where the player was roughly located. The maps in Thief 2 (likely to make navigating its large levels more manageable) were a lot more detailed and would update when the player explored new areas even if they weren’t originally included on the map. Deadly Shadows features much simpler and much vaguer maps. The player’s location is no longer highlighted, you often have to locate maps in the game world before they’re available, and they’re rendered so simplistically and gloss over so much of the actual level that it can feel like the map itself must be incorrect. The maps also aren’t always drawn so that up is north and often don’t have a key signifying their relationship to the cardinal directions. All of this can be a positive or a negative depending on who you ask. It took me a while to get used to, but I enjoyed the maps in Deadly Shadows. It adds some additional challenge to the game, and the levels are generally small and well designed enough that one rarely finds themselves pining for a more accurate map.
Deadly Shadows also focuses more on story and lore than the previous two games. DS has quite a lot of cutscenes as well as readable notes and books that shed light on its world. This is in contrast to the notes and books in the first two games that mostly functioned as delivery vehicles for hints on how to complete a level. I found myself actually getting sucked into the books and notes scattered around DS because I wanted learn more about the lore and story of the game. In the previous games I mostly just skimmed through notes for information on how to find secrets or complete the level. The story also does give a nice ending to Garrett’s character arc, which was a pleasant surprise. I wasn’t expecting DS to try to tie all three games together and give the story a sense of completeness but it does. There’s nothing particularly creative or subtle about the way DS does this, but it was nice nonetheless and provided a sense of closure to the trilogy.
Deadly Shadows suffers from a lot of significant problems, which causes it to be an enjoyable but ultimately frustrating experience. The bones of a good Thief game are there, but its lack of polish and largely linear nature prevents it from living up to the high standard set by its predecessors. I would really only recommend this game to fans of Thief that have already played the first two games. It’s a satisfying and enjoyable send off for the series and one that I think most Thief fans will enjoy in spite of its problems. If you’re not a Thief fan, and you’re just looking for a solid stealth game there are a lot of much better options out there.
N.B - the sneaky upgrade mod is absolutely necessary for playing this game on PC. I won’t go into all the reasons why but trust me - you don’t want this game to be even jankier than it already is. I initially tried playing DS unmodded and found it to be literally unplayable without all the movement and sensitivity options enabled by the sneaky upgrade. Even if you’re the most hardcore “I only do vanilla the first time around” player you need this mod. This is the only game I’ve ever played that I would say this for. Just enable the fixes and disable any graphical or gameplay changes. This game goes from a fun but flawed title to near-unplayable without it.
The biggest and most immediately apparent issue is Garrett’s movement. Deadly Shadows ditched the engine used for the first two Thief games and movement in this new engine is really janky and at times just bad. Mandalore’s review of this game is illuminating in this regard but to quickly summarize - most of these issues come from the poorly implemented 3rd person perspective and the way the position and physicality of Garrett’s body interacts with objects in the environment. Garrett’s movement feels sluggish, he regularly gets caught on the environment, he frequently glitches out and starts floating around the level, and trying to jump on and vault over objects is an absolute nightmare. Whenever you try to climb through an open window there’s a 90% chance you’ll just jump in place, alerting every nearby guard in the process. Using the blackjack to stealthily knock out guards is similarly janky. Unlike in the previous games where the blackjack can knock out a guard from any angle as long as you’re undetected, Deadly Shadows requires you be at a very precise angle behind an enemy for the knock-out to work. If you get the wrong angle (which is very easy to do even when you’re directly behind a guard) you’ll just give them a weak little bop on the noggin causing them to turn around and immediately stab you in the chest. All of this jank pretty much necessitates frequent quick saving unless you’re willing to let the game’s bad movement mechanics blow a stealth run for absolutely no reason. This required save-scumming likely won’t bother people who would be doing that anyway i.e truly elevated players that realize save scumming is one of the proudest PC gaming traditions and a very cool thing to be mildly addicted to, but it can be bummer for anyone who quick saves infrequently because they enjoy being forced to adapt to mistakes they might make. I honestly thought about ditching the game during the tutorial mission due to how bad movement felt. It’s incredibly jarring if you’re playing it right after finishing the previous two Thief titles like I was. I got used to it after about an hour however, and the game can still be fun in spite of it. All in all movement is serviceable but at times very frustrating and generally just a huge step down from the near perfect movement mechanics of the original two games.
Level design and gameplay follow in the footsteps of the original two games with a large focus on light and sound, slow meticulous movement, and the creative use of Garrett’s tools. DS is, however, a lot more linear than the first two games, which takes away a lot of the immersive sim elements present in those titles. The atmosphere in DS is very strong though. Ambient music plays a much larger role in this game, frequently veering into full on horror territory, and it creates an emotional experience that can be very different from that of the first two games. In levels that really lean into the horror tone there can be a tremendous amount of tension, which does work well in short bursts. “Robbing the Cradle” is one of these levels and has risen to somewhat legendary status due to how scary it is. It’s a master class in atmosphere and level design and definitely one of the highlights of the game even if it doesn’t engage with DS’s stealth mechanics as effectively as other levels do.
The biggest intentional difference between Deadly Shadows and its predecessors is the presence of a hub world. In between missions you’ll be given the opportunity to explore various districts of The City. In The City you can sell your loot to a fence (something you have to do manually now, which I found to be a fun and immersion increasing gameplay feature as opposed to a pointless annoyance), you can take on side quests, look for loot, and also search for maps that you can use to get your bearings in future missions. All of this is generally pretty fun and works relatively well. It has a lot of potential but unfortunately fails to fully realize it most of the time. The City is pretty samey and can get boring to walk through after a while. Side quests also usually boil down to hints about where loot is stashed and nothing more. There are also moments where DS seems to be going for a dynamic hub world that reacts to the player’s behavior during missions, but this ultimately isn’t fleshed out. There are only a few instances of very minor dynamic interactions between the hub world and player choices. These all work well and feel rewarding and immersive, but I just wish the game leaned into it more heavily. Using the hub world to actually make you think about what you steal, who you steal from, and how violently you behave on missions is a really interesting idea for a Thief game. That’s sadly not the game we got with Deadly Shadows though. Different factions roam the hub world and depending on whether or not Garrett has done some quick side quests to raise his reputation with them they may or may not be hostile to him. These factions also interact with each other in the streets, which is a cool idea, but is implemented horribly. By the end of the game, five different factions are in an all out war with each other - and seemingly with civilians as well. During this part of the game you can just hide and wait for the factions to kill each other, so you can walk around the hub world mostly unopposed. It’s ends up being unintentionally hilarious just how chaotic and ridiculous this all is.
Another intentional difference between DS and the previous two games (Thief 2 in particular) is the simplifying of in game maps. The maps in Thief 1 were often vague and didn’t include every area of a level but would highlight where the player was roughly located. The maps in Thief 2 (likely to make navigating its large levels more manageable) were a lot more detailed and would update when the player explored new areas even if they weren’t originally included on the map. Deadly Shadows features much simpler and much vaguer maps. The player’s location is no longer highlighted, you often have to locate maps in the game world before they’re available, and they’re rendered so simplistically and gloss over so much of the actual level that it can feel like the map itself must be incorrect. The maps also aren’t always drawn so that up is north and often don’t have a key signifying their relationship to the cardinal directions. All of this can be a positive or a negative depending on who you ask. It took me a while to get used to, but I enjoyed the maps in Deadly Shadows. It adds some additional challenge to the game, and the levels are generally small and well designed enough that one rarely finds themselves pining for a more accurate map.
Deadly Shadows also focuses more on story and lore than the previous two games. DS has quite a lot of cutscenes as well as readable notes and books that shed light on its world. This is in contrast to the notes and books in the first two games that mostly functioned as delivery vehicles for hints on how to complete a level. I found myself actually getting sucked into the books and notes scattered around DS because I wanted learn more about the lore and story of the game. In the previous games I mostly just skimmed through notes for information on how to find secrets or complete the level. The story also does give a nice ending to Garrett’s character arc, which was a pleasant surprise. I wasn’t expecting DS to try to tie all three games together and give the story a sense of completeness but it does. There’s nothing particularly creative or subtle about the way DS does this, but it was nice nonetheless and provided a sense of closure to the trilogy.
Deadly Shadows suffers from a lot of significant problems, which causes it to be an enjoyable but ultimately frustrating experience. The bones of a good Thief game are there, but its lack of polish and largely linear nature prevents it from living up to the high standard set by its predecessors. I would really only recommend this game to fans of Thief that have already played the first two games. It’s a satisfying and enjoyable send off for the series and one that I think most Thief fans will enjoy in spite of its problems. If you’re not a Thief fan, and you’re just looking for a solid stealth game there are a lot of much better options out there.
N.B - the sneaky upgrade mod is absolutely necessary for playing this game on PC. I won’t go into all the reasons why but trust me - you don’t want this game to be even jankier than it already is. I initially tried playing DS unmodded and found it to be literally unplayable without all the movement and sensitivity options enabled by the sneaky upgrade. Even if you’re the most hardcore “I only do vanilla the first time around” player you need this mod. This is the only game I’ve ever played that I would say this for. Just enable the fixes and disable any graphical or gameplay changes. This game goes from a fun but flawed title to near-unplayable without it.
2001
This is a game that oozes charm and really nails the postmodern take on neo-noir it’s going for. Tone, atmosphere, and writing are top notch. Gameplay is good but doesn’t shine in the same way. This is a pretty difficult and at times rather unfair game that starts to creep towards a trial and error experience due to enemy placement and the power of their shots. Your pattern of play towards the very difficult endgame will probably be like this: enter room, bullet time shoot the two enemies in the corner, get one-shotted by a barely visible enemy with a shotgun who’s 50 feet behind you, reload your game, make sure to shoot the shotgun enemy as well, keep resetting until you can successfully kill him and the other two. This isn’t a great gameplay loop but Max Payne’s charm and the tension and challenge created by its gameplay allowed me to mostly ignore this issue. Moreover, even when gameplay boils down to trial and error there’s enough creativity and dexterity demanded of the player that Max Payne never feels monotonous and can’t be beaten simply through rote memorization of enemy positions. I would definitely recommend this game to people who like shooters and people who enjoy playing games with a really clear and well defined artistic vision. I would also recommend downloading some community fix mods because the game has some bugs and can be quite difficult to run on modern machines.
2017
Really satisfying gameplay - surprisingly kept me entertained through all five endings and never devolved into a slog. However, story suffers greatly from over-ambition and its gargantuan scale, which causes a lot of story moments, concepts, and characters to be rushed in and out the door without the attention needed for them to be truly impactful. This causes certain moments clearly intended to be impactful and thought provoking to fall flat on their face in a way that is at times kind of hard to watch. The bathos of these moments is particularly intense because there’s a lot of talent at work here and a huge amount of potential inherent in the themes and concepts present in the game. This certainly isn’t a bad game but playing it immediately after Nier Replicant, which for me has probably the most gracefully rendered and emotionally impactful story I’ve ever seen in a game, left me quite disappointed. Comparing these two games is helpful in illustrating my main gripe with Automata’s story. Nier / Nier Replicant has a a simple story with simple themes that have been explored in countless pieces of media but it engages with these themes with style, grace, and empathy that’s genuinely unmatched. Automata has a rather complicated story and deals with a lot of pretty complex themes and the game ultimately breaks under the weight of everything it tries to tackle - leaving players with a story that is at times insightful and emotionally impactful but that contains a lot of moments that feel rather trite and at times frankly nonsensical.
Overall Nier Automata is immaculately scored, voice acted, designed, animated, and considered from a gameplay perspective but the emotional impact of its story just isn’t quite there - it never lives up to the potential inherent in its concept and themes, which is a massive shame.
Overall Nier Automata is immaculately scored, voice acted, designed, animated, and considered from a gameplay perspective but the emotional impact of its story just isn’t quite there - it never lives up to the potential inherent in its concept and themes, which is a massive shame.
first off - you need to play with the restored content mod for the optimal experience. this is a great game with even greater potential unfortunately hampered a bit by rushed development. There are some bugs and storylines that dont get fleshed out all the way. If they had time to finish it this game would be a legit 10/10. although even in its imperfect state the story and characters are far more nuanced and complex than those in KOTOR 1. The combat is also smoother and more enjoyable to boot.
The Jedi being painted in a negative or ambiguous light almost always signals a promising piece of Star Wars media to me. Anyone who isn’t a raving fan boy or a small child can see that Jedi are a little bit off. They’re a reclusive and supremacist cult of celibate and emotionless space monks who abduct children and force them to abandon all outside relationships. There are however, also good things about the Jedi - they’re very well intentioned and truly want to create peace in the universe, they’re wise in many ways, and they’re also amazing fighters with really cool tech. KOTOR 2 is partially a story about the failure of the Jedi. It earnestly examines the ideology of the Jedi as if they were real and interrogates why they would fail to affect positive change. This is a level of care and thoughtfulness that is practically unheard of in the Star Wars universe. While I love the classic Star Wars films because they’re a fun time, they’re certainly not thoughtful, nuanced, and critical in the way KOTOR 2 is. It’s truly a shame we don’t get more stories that are really trying to interrogate the tropes and conventions of the Star Wars universe.
It’s makes me really sad that this game wasn’t totally finished and that we never got an Obsidian developed KOTOR 3. Obsidian has the somewhat hilarious tendency to helm the sequels to series created by other developers and pretty handily out do them in almost every way. I’m so glad they started (?) that trend with this game.
The Jedi being painted in a negative or ambiguous light almost always signals a promising piece of Star Wars media to me. Anyone who isn’t a raving fan boy or a small child can see that Jedi are a little bit off. They’re a reclusive and supremacist cult of celibate and emotionless space monks who abduct children and force them to abandon all outside relationships. There are however, also good things about the Jedi - they’re very well intentioned and truly want to create peace in the universe, they’re wise in many ways, and they’re also amazing fighters with really cool tech. KOTOR 2 is partially a story about the failure of the Jedi. It earnestly examines the ideology of the Jedi as if they were real and interrogates why they would fail to affect positive change. This is a level of care and thoughtfulness that is practically unheard of in the Star Wars universe. While I love the classic Star Wars films because they’re a fun time, they’re certainly not thoughtful, nuanced, and critical in the way KOTOR 2 is. It’s truly a shame we don’t get more stories that are really trying to interrogate the tropes and conventions of the Star Wars universe.
It’s makes me really sad that this game wasn’t totally finished and that we never got an Obsidian developed KOTOR 3. Obsidian has the somewhat hilarious tendency to helm the sequels to series created by other developers and pretty handily out do them in almost every way. I’m so glad they started (?) that trend with this game.
Definitely my least favorite of the Resident Evil games I’ve played so far and the first one to just feel quite bland and tedious to me despite having decent potential and some great moments.
The good: aquatic horror setting and theming is fantastic with some genuinely creepy and creative enemy designs. I love the horrifying tube sucker thing that emerges from enemies’ mouths and latches on your head when you get grabbed. Combat can also be quite fun at times - functioning as a somewhat simplified version of RE5’s combat. I also enjoyed being able to mod weapons which allowed me to make an absurd 8000 dps magnum to use against the final boss (for reference standard pistol has around 300dps and the bolt action rifle has around 1300). This surprisingly didn’t destroy the balance of the game due to this sort of upgrade only being available in the last hour or so and the scarcity of magnum rounds. The final boss fight is also fantastic in this game. Definitely one of the most creative and difficult boss fights in the series - even with my illegally modded burst fire murder cannon.
The bad: this game switches back and forth between characters and settings 15+ times and it absolutely destroys the pacing of this game. The moment you start to feel immersed in the process of exploring the wonderfully creepy queen zenobia as Jill Valentine, you’re forced into a flash back with a different character or a largely on rails segment with Chris Redfield three days earlier or a cutscene featuring the inane banter and quips of two of the most annoying characters I’ve ever seen in a video game. (I can’t even be bothered to remember their names - Skeeter and Streeter or something. My best description of these two would be Jar Jar Binks meets the Property Brothers.) All of this switching back and forth is in service of the story, which uses these different character perspectives to set up cliff hangers and slowly reveal the details of the conspiracy surrounding the events of the game. None of this is particularly engaging and certainly not engaging enough to justify design decisions that disrupt the flow and pacing of gameplay.
The story in this game is generally serviceable but bland and pointlessly convoluted - bordering on nonsensical at times. The nicest thing I can say about the story is that it’s weird in a mildly interesting way. The story is a full on techno-thriller, and it was somewhat entertaining to see how this genre was applied to the lore of Resident Evil. Overall, however, the story was just kind of boring and at times kind of pretentious (the various inane allusions to Dante Alighieri), which is something I never thought I’d be saying about a Resident Evil game.
Can’t say id recommend this game even to Resident Evil fans. With other games in the series that are severely flawed like RE5 and RE0 there’s typically a few things they do that make them worth playing in spite of their flaws. This is definitely a functional game and one that’s weird and unique enough that there are probably some people out there that will love its idiosyncrasies, but these people are likely few and far between.
The good: aquatic horror setting and theming is fantastic with some genuinely creepy and creative enemy designs. I love the horrifying tube sucker thing that emerges from enemies’ mouths and latches on your head when you get grabbed. Combat can also be quite fun at times - functioning as a somewhat simplified version of RE5’s combat. I also enjoyed being able to mod weapons which allowed me to make an absurd 8000 dps magnum to use against the final boss (for reference standard pistol has around 300dps and the bolt action rifle has around 1300). This surprisingly didn’t destroy the balance of the game due to this sort of upgrade only being available in the last hour or so and the scarcity of magnum rounds. The final boss fight is also fantastic in this game. Definitely one of the most creative and difficult boss fights in the series - even with my illegally modded burst fire murder cannon.
The bad: this game switches back and forth between characters and settings 15+ times and it absolutely destroys the pacing of this game. The moment you start to feel immersed in the process of exploring the wonderfully creepy queen zenobia as Jill Valentine, you’re forced into a flash back with a different character or a largely on rails segment with Chris Redfield three days earlier or a cutscene featuring the inane banter and quips of two of the most annoying characters I’ve ever seen in a video game. (I can’t even be bothered to remember their names - Skeeter and Streeter or something. My best description of these two would be Jar Jar Binks meets the Property Brothers.) All of this switching back and forth is in service of the story, which uses these different character perspectives to set up cliff hangers and slowly reveal the details of the conspiracy surrounding the events of the game. None of this is particularly engaging and certainly not engaging enough to justify design decisions that disrupt the flow and pacing of gameplay.
The story in this game is generally serviceable but bland and pointlessly convoluted - bordering on nonsensical at times. The nicest thing I can say about the story is that it’s weird in a mildly interesting way. The story is a full on techno-thriller, and it was somewhat entertaining to see how this genre was applied to the lore of Resident Evil. Overall, however, the story was just kind of boring and at times kind of pretentious (the various inane allusions to Dante Alighieri), which is something I never thought I’d be saying about a Resident Evil game.
Can’t say id recommend this game even to Resident Evil fans. With other games in the series that are severely flawed like RE5 and RE0 there’s typically a few things they do that make them worth playing in spite of their flaws. This is definitely a functional game and one that’s weird and unique enough that there are probably some people out there that will love its idiosyncrasies, but these people are likely few and far between.
1998
fantastic game with probably the most nuanced choice based gameplay in the entire series. very similar to fallout 1 in terms of gameplay but with more content and quite a few QoL improvements especially re: companion mgmt. Ultimately falls a bit short of fallout 1 mostly due to weaker writing of main villains and final confrontation as well as issues with difficulty scaling. 2 overall tends to have higher highs but also lower lows compared to 1.
In many ways, Majoras Mask and Ocarina of time are very similar games. From an aesthetic and design perspective they look and feel very similar. All the good things about the gameplay and design of Ocarina of Time are present in full force in Majora's Mask. The emotional experience that MM creates for the player however, could not be more different than that of Ocarina of TIme. Where Ocarina of time tends feel like a fun, relaxing, and balanced experience Majora's Mask often feels like a depressing and bewildering ordeal. This however, isn't neccessarily a bad thing. This is not a relaxing or pleasant game to beat, but it is a very rewarding one to beat. The harsh time limit, the often cryptic nature of side quests, the increased difficulty of dungeons and the dour tone of the game all work towards the common end of producing an experience where the player is meant to struggle and feel helpless. As a player, you're made to experience a lot of the same emotions that characters in the game are feeling. For people who can get past the unwelcoming nature of this game, this produces an intimate connection with the game world and a feeling of investment in your actions that not many games achieve. Most Zelda games aren't much more than very fun and engaging romps that sometimes have emotionally resonant stories that ground and enhance the experience. This is something very different. Majora's Mask is that rare and perfect melding of gameplay, story and characters where all work perfectly together to create something far greater than the sum of its parts. Games like this are often lightning in a bottle. It can be difficult to pin down exactly why it works so well in certain games and not in others, why some games have to settle for being merely great and why others can achieve a transcendent status for many players. Majora's Mask struck lightning for me, and I'm so glad it did.
I don’t have a ton to say about this game. It’s a relatively fun light gun shooter with Resident Evil theming. Game contains 4 different scenarios: abridged versions of RE1 (2002) and RE0, a very strange faux retelling of RE3 and an original story “Umbrella’s End” that involves Chris Redfield and Jill Valentine giving the killing blow to Umbrella by leading a raid on one of their last facilities. These scenarios are narratively linked in a fun way. They’re all set up as Albert Wesker studying and recounting reports that Umbrella compiled on all of these events. The game also contains bonus missions related to these scenarios that show events not featured in the original games like how Wesker escaped the Arklay facility, what Rebecca was doing in the Arklay mansion before everyone else arrived, how Ada Wong escaped Raccoon City after the events of RE2. None of these added scenarios contribute a ton of new information (probably a good thing) but they’re generally fun levels to play through and can feature some nice character moments like with Rebecca’s added RE1 scenarios.
Don’t have any big complaints about the light gun gameplay. It can be a fun challenge and was entertaining throughout my play through. I even enjoyed going back through a few of the levels to get better scores.
My favorite thing about this game as a fan of the RE series was definitely getting to revisit the nicely recreated locations from RE1 and RE0 from a first person perspective. I would add RE3 to this but this game’s RE3 scenario doesn’t feature any iconic locations from that game except the police station and doesn’t follow the plot of RE3 like the other games do with RE1 and RE0. Unsure why this happened but feels like this scenario got rushed for whatever reason and is definitely kind of disappointing given how much I like RE3.
The retelling of the stories of the games featured is also a little bit disappointing due to how little time gets spent on each game. There are only 3 main levels per game featured so there’s just not enough time to go through all the memorable moments and plot points from those games. For comparison the Darkside Chronicles - the other RE light gun game for the Wii features retellings of RE2 and Code Veronica and dedicates 8 surprisingly long levels to each of them which allows for the space to have a condensed but complete retelling of these stories.
Despite its flaws and the things I wish it did differently this is still a fun light gun game, which is all it really needs to be, and I overall enjoyed my time with it.
Don’t have any big complaints about the light gun gameplay. It can be a fun challenge and was entertaining throughout my play through. I even enjoyed going back through a few of the levels to get better scores.
My favorite thing about this game as a fan of the RE series was definitely getting to revisit the nicely recreated locations from RE1 and RE0 from a first person perspective. I would add RE3 to this but this game’s RE3 scenario doesn’t feature any iconic locations from that game except the police station and doesn’t follow the plot of RE3 like the other games do with RE1 and RE0. Unsure why this happened but feels like this scenario got rushed for whatever reason and is definitely kind of disappointing given how much I like RE3.
The retelling of the stories of the games featured is also a little bit disappointing due to how little time gets spent on each game. There are only 3 main levels per game featured so there’s just not enough time to go through all the memorable moments and plot points from those games. For comparison the Darkside Chronicles - the other RE light gun game for the Wii features retellings of RE2 and Code Veronica and dedicates 8 surprisingly long levels to each of them which allows for the space to have a condensed but complete retelling of these stories.
Despite its flaws and the things I wish it did differently this is still a fun light gun game, which is all it really needs to be, and I overall enjoyed my time with it.